Lord Monbodo

To Lund ap Lunds

I'm a bit shocked that Boerd has taken so long. He's usually quicker than me to post.

But with Void gone I need to marry my daughter off to someone quick.

To Lund ap Lunds

Damn good song.

To Lund ap Lunds

At least it's not as bad as my game where England has a union with Castile and rules 80% of the colonies in the world.

To Lund ap Lunds

Flooby Badoop said
I can imagine how that would go down. . ."For perhaps attempting to think of a plot against my reign, I'm afraid it is my duty to do everything in my power to make your life a living nightmare for the next 24 hours. May God have mercy on you."Myself, played as the Queen of Scotland. Killed all my sons but my youngest, so he would inherit, then killed everyone who would inherit the county of Trondelag until it went to me, which was about 12 people.Two more needed to die until I inherited, but I didn't need to kill them , because they died of pneumonia and old age, respectively.

Well each of those things invalidates a character from succession but I had just left him to rot in my dungeon unharmed. My dukes started a rebellion in his name anyway and I was trying to get them to go home without getting kinslayer. It was my mercy that killed him. If I had just blinded him day one then the rebellion would have never happened.

To Lund ap Lunds

Heyitsjiwon said
Played as Ethiopia... got invaded by all the Muslims in about 50 years. Never again.

This is funnier because I recently invaded Ethiopia as the Muslims.

But my greatest atrocity would probably be the time I blinded, then castrated, THEN killed my brother as the Byzantine Emperor.

To Lund ap Lunds

Fair enough.

To spark up conversation in this thread, what's the worst thing you've ever done in Crusader Kings?

To Lund ap Lunds

Flooby Badoop said
That is correct, yes.Diplomacy is actually instantaneous, and can be handled ICly or via PMs. It would be a good idea for players to communicate with each other with both, to get all the deets ironed out without causing confuzzles. It's up to the two players to decide what happens when in these cases, subject to my approval if the actions need to be secret or extra-ordinary.In your case, you could start your post having already received and responded to the message from Lady Dryden.My apologies, by the way. I don't think I mentioned this in the rules.

Flooby Badoop said
That is correct, yes.Diplomacy is actually instantaneous, and can be handled ICly or via PMs. It would be a good idea for players to communicate with each other with both, to get all the deets ironed out without causing confuzzles. It's up to the two players to decide what happens when in these cases, subject to my approval if the actions need to be secret or extra-ordinary.In your case, you could start your post having already received and responded to the message from Lady Dryden.My apologies, by the way. I don't think I mentioned this in the rules.

Good to have that cleared up. I figured that the travel times needed to send a message back and forth could easily be completed in a season, but it might not be clear in every situation.

On the seasonal posts, how do we handle events that require players to take actions and then react to each other's actions in a short span of time. For example, marching orders. Suppose two armies are maneuvering around each other in a game of cat and mouse (Not that I ever employ such dishonorable tactics... *cough*). If both armies have good scouts they could react to enemy movements in a few days time. Not mention the possibility of a truce to negotiate or a battle occurring before the season ended.

To Lund ap Lunds

On another note, is anyone else even in the running for that bishopric?

To Lund ap Lunds

FortunesFaded said
Hm.. What if, in the case of inactivity, rather than scheduling a reboot, simply (after a certain period of time) allowing a new player who wants to join the choice of either A.) inheriting the kingdom as is, inactive player's characters and all, or B.) Having their own House overthrow the inactive players' House to take those lands. The vassals could then perhaps choose (based on their loyalty to the old Lord, or other traits that Flooby used to define them) to stick with the new lord or become independent. The latter would allow greater potential for conflict in the game (and avoid the whole 'lets all sign NAPs and trade treaties and live happily ever after' syndrome), and greater potential for expansion. Just a thought :)

^This. I'd hate to see all our work get rebooted since there are at least five players who were on the ball and are just waiting for everyone else to post.

To Lund ap Lunds

Awesome.